[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 21, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-31357]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: December 21, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-475-703]
Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Italy; Preliminary
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on granular
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from Italy for the period August
1, 1991 through July 31, 1992. The review covers one manufacturer/
exporter of this merchandise to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A.
We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below
the foreign market value (FMV). If these preliminary results are
adopted in our final results of administrative review, we will instruct
U.S. Customs to assess antidumping duties equal to the difference
between the United States price (USP) and the FMV.
We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary
results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 21, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Copyak or Richard Herring, Office of Countervailing Compliance,
Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, DC; telephone: (202) 482-2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 12, 1992, the Department published in the Federal
Register a notice of ``Opportunity to Request Administrative Review''
(57 FR 36063) of the antidumping order on PTFE resin from Italy (53 FR
33163; August 30, 1988). On August 31, 1992, Ausimont S.p.A. and
Ausimont U.S.A. requested an administrative review of the order for the
period August 1, 1991 through July 31, 1992. We initiated the review on
September 28, 1992 (57 FR 44551). Verifications were conducted in
Milan, Italy, September 13-16, 1993, and in Morristown, New Jersey,
November 22-23, 1993. The Department is conducting this administrative
review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act).
Scope of the Review
Imports covered by this review are shipments of PTFE resin which is
classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number
3904.61.00. PTFE dispersions in water and fine powders are not covered
by this order. The HTS item number is provided for convenience and
Customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive. The
order on PTFE resin from Italy also covers PTFE wet raw polymer
exported from Italy to the United States (see Granular
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy; Final Determination of
Circumvention of Antidumping Duty Order (58 FR 26100; April 30, 1993).
However, because the Department issued its preliminary affirmative
determination of circumvention and ordered the suspension of
liquidation of wet raw polymer entries after the review period, entries
of PTFE wet raw polymer are not subject to this particular review (see
Memorandum to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated September 10, 1993; The Third Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Granular
Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy, which is on file in the
Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main Commerce Building)).
The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of Italian PTFE resin
to the United States, Ausimont S.p.A., and the review period is August
1, 1991 through July 31, 1992.
United States Price (USP)
The Department based USP on exporter's sales price (ESP), in
accordance with section 772(c) of the Act, because all sales to
unrelated parties were made after importation of the subject
merchandise into the United States. We calculated ESP based on the
packed, delivered prices to unrelated purchasers in the United States.
We made deductions, where appropriate, for foreign inland freight,
ocean freight, marine insurance, brokerage and handling charges, U.S.
duty, and U.S. inland freight in accordance with section 772(d)(2)(A)
of the Act. We made further deductions, where appropriate, for rebates,
credit expenses, warranties, technical services, and indirect selling
expenses pursuant to section 772(e)(2) of the Act.
We also adjusted USP for taxes (i.e., value-added taxes) in
accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicon Manganese from
Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value
(59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994).
Foreign Market Value (FMV)
The Department calculated FMV using home market prices, as defined
in section 773(a) of the Act, since sufficient quantities of such or
similar merchandise were sold in the home market to provide a basis of
comparison. When possible, we compared sales of identical merchandise
in the two markets. For each instance in which identical merchandise
was not sold in Italy during the relevant contemporaneous period, we
selected the contemporaneous home market sale or sales of the product
that was the most similar to the merchandise involved in the U.S. sale.
See 19 U.S.C. 1667(16). We then compared the U.S. sale to the selected
sale or sales and, if appropriate, made adjustments for differences in
merchandise.
To achieve the most appropriate comparisons, home market sales were
matched with U.S. sales according to the amounts and types of fillers
in the products sold and the percentages of those fillers. See
Memorandum To File dated August 2, 1994; Changes in the Model Match
Methodology for Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy,
which is on file in the Central Records Unit (room B099 of the Main
Commerce Building).
FMV was based on packed, delivered prices to unrelated customers in
Italy, with appropriate deductions from the home market price for
inland freight and insurance, credit expenses, and home market packing.
We added U.S. packing to the home market price in accordance with
section 773(a)(1) of the Act. We then made adjustments to the home
market price for indirect selling expenses, which we limited to the
amount of indirect selling expenses incurred in the United States, in
accordance with 19 CFR 353.56(b)(2). In addition, we included in FMV
the amount of value-added taxes collected in the home market in
accordance with our practice as outlined in Silicon Manganese from
Venezuela, Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value
(59 FR 31204, June 17, 1994).
Preliminary Results of the Review
As a result of our comparison of USP with FMV, we preliminarily
determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin existed
during the period August 1, 1991 through July 31, 1992:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/Exporter Period (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ausimont S.p.A.................................. 08/01/91-
07/31/92 13.31
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department shall determine and the Customs Service shall assess
antidumpting duties on all appropriate entries. Individual differences
between USP and FMV may vary from the percentage stated above. Upon
completion of this review, the Department will issue appraisement
instructions directly to the Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
for all shipments of the subject merchandise, entered, or withdrawn
from warehouses, for consumption on or after the publication of the
final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed
company will be the rate established in the final results in this
administrative review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated
companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if
the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or
the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)
for merchandise exported by all other manufacturers and exporters who
are nor covered by this or any previous administrative review conducted
by the Department, the cash deposit rate will be the ``all-others''
rate established in the LTFV investigation.
On March 25, 1993, the Court of International Trade (CIT), in
Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993), and
Federal-Mogul Corporation v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 782 (CIT
1993), decided that once an ``all others'' rate is established for a
company, it can only be changed through an administrative review. The
Department has determined that in order to implement these decisions,
it is appropriate to reinstate the original ``all others'' rate from
the LTFV investigation (or that rate as amended for correction of
clerical errors or as a result of litigation) in proceedings governed
by antidumping duty orders. In proceedings governed by antidumping
findings, unless we are able to ascertain the ``all others'' rate from
the original LTFV investigation, the Department has determined that it
is appropriate to adopt the ``new shipper'' rate established in the
first final results of administrative review published by the
Department (or that rate as amended for correction of clerical errors
or as a result of litigation) as the ``all others'' rate for the
purposes of establishing cash deposits in all current and future
administrative reviews.
Because this proceeding is governed by an antidumping duty order,
the ``all others'' rate for the purposes of this review will be 46.46
percent--the ``all others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation
(50 FR 26019; June 24, 1985).
These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect
until publication of the final results of the next administrative
review.
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
Public Comment
Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of
the date of publication of this notice. Interested parties may submit a
written request for hearing not later than 10 days after publication of
this notice. In accordance with 19 CFR 353.38(c)(1)(ii), interested
parties may submit written comments or arguments in case briefs on
these preliminary results within 30 days of the date of publication.
Rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments raised in case briefs, may be
submitted 7 days after the time limit for filing the case briefs. Any
hearing, if requested, will be held 7 days after the scheduled date for
submission of rebuttal briefs. Copies of case briefs and rebuttal
briefs must be served on interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR
353.38(e).
The Department will publish the final results of this
administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues
raised in any case or rebuttal brief or at a hearing.
This administrative review and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)(B)) and 19 CFR
353.22(c)(5).
Dated: December 8, 1994.
Paul L. Joffe,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-31357 Filed 12-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
